Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1887-08-31
THE DECISION GIVEN.
JUSTICE FIELDS STATEMENT OF THE Pa
GIFIC RAILWAY CASE.
Right Of Personal Security Involves Right Over
Private PaPen-Lei Of Congress UncOnstitu-
tional-POwersOf Of Commission Limited.
Kinds Of Testimony Received.

NnaNNiSSOy -huSusb aAi
opinion deciding that the Pacific Commis-
sion cannot compel the surrender Of the
Central Pacific books, Justice Field of the
u s Supreme Court said: ''Few rights Of
greater Importance or more essential 10 a
citizens peace and happiness than the right
personal security and that involves not
merely the protection Of his person from
assault, but exemption Of his private affairs,
books and papers from inspection of Others,
without enjoyment Of this right all oth-'
rights would. lose half Lille. Ihe
law provides for compulsory production in
propress of iua;.aal proceedings, as by
direo. -.,t for that purpose, Of such docu-
ments as the interest Of Others and
also in' cases for seizure Of
crimininating papers necessary Tor the
prosecution of offenders against public jus.
tice, and only in one of these ways can
they be obtained and their contents made
known against the will of their owners.
The act Of Congress not only authorizes a
searching inyestig ,tion into the methods,
affairs and business of the Central Pacific
Railroad Company, but makes it the duty
of the railroad commissioners to inquire
into, to ascertain and report whether any
directors, officers or employees of the com
pany have been, or are now, directly or in
directly interested and to what amount OF
extent, in any other railroad, steamship,
telegraph, express, mining, construction OF
other business company OF corporation,
and with
WHICH ANY AGREEMENTS,
undertaking or leases have been made oil
entered into. There are over one hundred
officers of the Central Pacific Railroad
Company and nearly five thousand en-
ployes 1t is not unreasonable to suppose
large portion Of these have the same in
terest as stockholders or otherwise in
some other company with which railroad
company they may have an agreement OI
some kind, and it would be difficult to
state its extent to which an exploration OF
the commissioners into private affairs O.
those persons may not 60, if the mandate
of the act could be fully carried out. The
commission is limited in its inquiries into
the interest of these directors, officers and
employees in other business, company
or corporation, to such matters
as persons may choose to dis
close. They cannot be compelled
to open books and to expose such othel
business to the commission. With refer
ence to vouchers, respecting which tn,
principal interrogatories are propounded
and to which we are asked to compel an
swers from the witness, it is conceded b.
the Commissioners on his motion tha
moneys covered by them were not charged
against the United States in ascertainin,
net earnings of company. II such wer
the case it is
DIFFICULT TO SEE WHAT INTEREST
the United States can have in the disposi
ton of those moneys. Be that as it may
the general courts can't, upon that conces
sion, aid the committee in ascertainiD
how the moneys were expended. Thos
courts cannot become an instrument OF tn
committee in furthering its investigation
The act of Congress creating the railroa,
commission in terms provides, as alread
stated, that it may invoke the aid of an
circuit or district conrt to require the at
tendance of witnesses and the production
of books, papers and documents relating t
the subject of inquiry, and empowers tn
court, for coDtumacy or refusal of person
to obey subpenas to them, I
issue orders requiring them to ap
pear before the commissioners, o
either of them, and produce book
and papers ordered, and give evidenc
touching matters in question, and to pun
ish disobedence to its orders, and does no
appear to leave any discretion in the mat
ter with the court. The Federal court
cannot be made instruments to aid th
commissioners in their Investigations, an
il also renders it unnecessary TO make an
comment upon the extraordinary positio
taken by them, according to the statenen
of respondent, to which we have referred
that they did not regard themselves boun
in their examination by ordinary rules q
evidence, but would receive hear.say an
exparte statemhnts, surmises and informa
tion Of every character that might be calle
to their attention. II cannot he that court
of the United States can be used to the ful
therance of Investigations in which al
rules of evidence may be thus disregarded.